teleological argument

Question 1

epicurean hypothesis

Answer 1

-finite particles given infinite time will eventually form order
-Hume adapted idea from Epicurus greek philosopher

Question 2

strengths of aquinas fifth way

Answer 2

-examples in nature of non thinking beings acting towards purpose- sunflowers turning to get sunlight
-arrow needs archer to direct it - reasonable to assume natural things directed to purpose
-need explanation for purpose- sign of conscious mind that plans an end within its design

Question 3

weakness of aquinas fifth way

Answer 3

-other reasons for purpose- evolved to suit role, looks like design but less adapted beings died out
-assumption of purpose, could be due to chance or natural things dont have innate purpose, might be human construct
-caused logical fallacy, leap to god of classical theism

Question 4

what did aquinas observe about world

Answer 4

things dont behave randomly but towards certain purpose or end ( telos)

Question 5

example of goal directed beings in nature

Answer 5

sunlight moves towards sun to get more sun
-acorn can grow into oak tree
-water falls as rain and goes part of water cycle
-planets orbit sun

Question 6

aquinas conclusion of things being goal directed

Answer 6

-not by chance that objects behave with purpose
-things in world cant direct themself towards telos
-thing cannot move without purpose unless intelligent being that has purpose in mind directed thing

Question 7

arrow analogy

Answer 7

arrow hits target even though not intelligent
-must be something that can comprehend goal of arrow that influenced it to move that way

Question 8

god directing things to purpose aquinas

Answer 8

-god directs behaviour of objects by creating natural laws which govern and regulate movement of objects
-god has power to make everything goal directed
-must be archer for arrow of universe which is god

Question 9

P1 P2 and C1 of aquinas fifth way

Answer 9

-behaviour of objects goal directed towards an end because they follow natural laws
-natural laws cant create themselves because not intelligent
-natural laws must have intelligent designer- god

Question 10

paleys pocket watch

Answer 10

-watch constructed with togs and clogs with purpose of telling time

Question 11

design qua purpose

Answer 11

paley compares mechanical watch with natural things
-eyes
brain
fish fins

Question 12

what did paley conclude from design qua purpose

Answer 12

-conclude of conscious mind intentionally designed purpose
-designer god

Question 13

design qua regularity -

Answer 13

-consistent purpose shown everywhere in nature
-gravity
orbits of planets

Question 14

arguments for paleys observations showing god exists

Answer 14

-a designer knows what they want to create, give creation purpose, purpose shows designer
-purpose seen in nature- birds, fish , eyes
-design qua regularity observed through order and patterns in nature, god behinf regularity
-even if watch broken, still designer behind watch

Question 15

arguments for paleys observations not showing god exists

Answer 15

-Dawkins says natural selection blind process, no intention or purpose
-some natural things dont have purpose or poor design like wasp or human appendix
-law of entropy shows tendency to disorder so no designing mind
-to many faults in world to suggest god created it, volcanoes, murder

Question 16

humes criticisms to analogies

Answer 16

-analogies can lead to mistaken conclusions, cant compare blood system to plants cells sap system
-philo from dialogues of natural religion shows how can you conclude to great god
-could there be many designers like how they build a ship

Question 17

humes criticism with a posteriori arguments

Answer 17

-fallacy of composition- can apply observations to world cant apply to universe or entire world
-we cannot see or assume there is designing mind or god behind it

Question 18

epicurean hypothesis as alternative reason to order of universe

Answer 18

-finite particles if given infinite time can fall into order by chance
-even though it may appear designed and arranged, due to constant motion and trial
-we can only observe current state because there is order

Question 19

humes criticisms are right

Answer 19

-cannot assume just because watch has designer world has one to, no way of knowing
-design argument leap of logic to concluding monotheistic god
-design assumes intentional design rather than by random chance
-assumes fallacy of composition- whats true for a part true for whole

Question 20

humes criticisms dont work

Answer 20

-similar effects have similar causes, paley argues even if we havent seen watch, we would still assume designer, same for world
-hume takes analogy to far, many people agree with argument but not god of classical theism
-it seems more credible to argue for design than chance- cant expect watch to throw in air and come together for purpose
-paley doesnt say world has design but things in it

Question 21

Darwin and evolution

Answer 21

-natural selection
-survival of fittest
-less advantageous species die out and ones with advantageous mutations die out

Question 22

how does evolution challenge teleological argument

Answer 22

-if species survived due to adaptation there is no need for designer god
-if evolution random process, against qua regularity and design
-challenges status and dignity of humans because evolved same way as animals

Question 23

Dawkins in the blind watchmaker against paleys analogy

Answer 23

-argues evolution carried through random but cumulative mutations in DNA which produce variation in life
-process blind- no telos or plan
-therefore no need for designer god

Question 24

arguments arguing evolution explains design in the world

Answer 24

-evolution challenged design argument, explains regularity and design as chance, natural selection
-world only appears designed because humans have given it design, gives a posteriori evidence of natural explanation
-evolution natural process so no foresight plan or purpose in mind, dont need to infer a designing mind

Question 25

arguments for teleological arguments explaining design better than evolution

Answer 25

-unlikely order came from chance , wouldnt think watch appeared so world didnt appear but has designer
-modern teleological arguments- Tennat anthropic principle, god set up laws of physics and allows process of evolution
-broken watch, even damaged still designer, even if faults in world still designed
-Tennants aesthetic principle, why we appreciate art and music, not in nature so could indicate benevolent god allowing us to feel pleasure

Question 26

use of analogies strength to design arguments

Answer 26

–provides best explanation for argument
-when we cant observe something its empirically valid to turn to analogies
-if we can explain something, its reasonable to expect the unobservable but analogous thing to have an analogous explanation
Swinburne- arguments from analogy are common in scientific inference

Question 27

weakness humes objection to analogy in design argument

Answer 27

-it doesnt follow the similarity of two effects that they must have had similar causes
-just because effect of universe and effect of man made house same in complex and purpose
-doesnt follow they have same causes
-radically disanalagous creation of universe could be to anything we know
-artifacts mechanical so precise
-universe organic, natural and chaotic

Question 28

evaluation defending design argument analogies do work

Answer 28

-paleys argument not based on analogy
-he argues there is property which requires designer of complexity and purpose
-when complex individual parts put together by chance
-nature requires designer because has property
-illustration not analogy

Question 29

strength of 5 the way is its basis in natural theology

Answer 29

-aquinas accepts design argument shows there is some designer of power but not christian god in particular
-McGrath says aquinas natural theology a posteriori demonstration of the coherence of faith and observation
-supports faith

Question 30

doesnt support monotheism weakness of aquinas

Answer 30

-even if universe has designer
-doesnt support monotheism
-could be committee of gods
-dead god, apprentice or junior god

Question 31

evaluation defending design argument ockams razor

Answer 31

-Swinburne - one god explanation for universe more simple than multiple gods
-uniformity of laws of physics suggests single designer
-argument only seeks to show reasonable to believe in designer not what designer is like

Question 32

strength of design argument inductive and a posteriori

Answer 32

-Hume, Russell, Dawkins say not enough evidence to believe in god
-design argument directly target position by attempting inductive proof of god
-use a posteriori only to prove god exists

Question 33

humes problem of evil weakness to design argument

Answer 33

-focus on good and avoid evil
-cant conclude perfect god because of evil in world
-focus on natural evil and animal suffering following modern science
-

Question 34

P1 P2 humes problem of evil against design argument

Answer 34

P1 - only justified in believing what evidence suggests
P2- only have evidence of good and evil in world
-C1- we are only justified in believing imperfection exists
C2- belief in perfectly good being not justified

Question 35

evalutation defending design from problem evil

Answer 35

-paley- even if watch broken must have watch maker so must be with universe
-theodicies from problem of evil

Question 36

strength of design argument is its reliance on purpose

Answer 36

-difficult for atheistic and scientific approach to account and explain for
-paley said some complexities can be from chance but when with purpose there is design evident
-aquinas relies on purpose - we observe that entities act towards an end

Question 37

darwins theory of evolution against design argument

Answer 37

-natural selection shows nature doesnt have purpose and design
-wrong to assume type of complexity has purpose and therefore design

Question 38

weakness of tennants aesthetic principle

Answer 38

-perception of beauty might serve some evolutionary function we dont understand
-might be biproduct of something which does provide survival like mate attraction
-hard to prove aesthetic sense doesnt relate to evolution

Question 39

weakness of tennants anthropic principle

Answer 39

-conditions on earth precise but universe large
-should expect there to be many earths like planets by chance
-estimates of 6 billion earth like planets

Question 40

strength of aquinas developed by tennant and swinburne focus on temporal order

Answer 40

paley relys on order of objects in space spatial
-spatial cant justify belief in god because can be explained by evolution, epicurean, spatial disorder
-temporal is order of things behaviour over time due to physical laws
-hydrogen same everywhere since it first existed
-

Question 41

fine tuning as strength of aquinas Tennant and swinburne

Answer 41

-if laws of our universe lesser or more humans could have mot existed
-unlikely for chance to explain precise laws
-science can tell us E=mc2 but not why E=mc2

Question 42

swinburnes personal explanation

Answer 42

-experience temporal regularities caused by people
-choose to sleep at night
-explanation of those temporal regularities that they were designed
-intentionally created by intelligent mind
-only god has power to have designed laws of physics

Question 43

multiverse theory against design argument

Answer 43

-our universe one of infinite number of universes
-every single possible type or universe exists
-some chaotic and some have order
-Max Tegmark physicist- defeats fine tuning swinburne and design arguments